Case Study Sample Format Case Study (Title) Background Provide a very brief background description of the situation that is being examined. The purpose of this section is to frame the main theme of the case study. Example: This case study examines the response and recovery efforts of various agencies after Hurricane Katrina… Key Issues Identify and briefly discuss the key issues and how they relate to the key stakeholders. Example: · Inter-agency Coordination…. · Communication… · Jurisdictional issues… Analysis Provide your analysis of each of the key issues described above. Consider the likely root causes. Also, it is important to state the starting point of your analysis. This disclaimer statement includes your values, biases, preconceptions, and prejudices at the onset of your analysis. Not only does this help the reader know where you are coming from (“where you stand is where you sit”), but it also helps you to understand where you are coming from. It will make your analysis more transparent, objective, and robust. Example: This case study is being analyzed as part of a class assignment. I have no direct stake in the results or conclusions of this analysis; however, as a victim of Hurricane Katrina, I have formed certain conclusions and opinions about the role of FEMA prior to this analysis. Prior to this analysis, it was my opinion that FEMA…. Issue 1: Initially, emergency response was hampered by the lack of coordination among the first responders. Many of the coordination issues may be attributed to misinformation….Lessons Learned, Recommendations, and Practical Applications Identify any lessons learned that can be applied by your agency or organization, or by you as an individual. Identify any organizational weaknesses or threats that came to light from the readings. Identify any strengths or opportunities that came to light from the readings. Consider the costs relative to the benefits of your recommendations. Discuss any potential barriers to implementation of your recommendations. Discuss the ramifications that may be associated with your recommendations. Identify any potential unintended consequences that may result from the implementation of the ideas. Each one of these areas can be under a separate sub-heading. KINES 260 – Lab 1 – Enjoyment of Exercise Introduction Exercise psychologists have suggested that enjoyment may play a major role in determining exercise adherence (Dishman, Sallis, & Orenstein, 1985). Kendzierski and DeCarlo (1991) created the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES) to measure enjoyment of specific physical activity and demonstrated adequate reliability and validity of the scale in these two studies. Dishman, Motl, Saunders, Felton, Ward, Dowda, and Pate (2005) also suggested that the following factors appear to influence exercise enjoyment: choice of physical activity, gender-separate activities, small group interaction, inclusiveness, a ...

1. Case Study Sample Format
Case Study (Title)
Background
Provide a very brief background description of the situation that
is being examined. The purpose of this section is to frame the
main theme of the case study.
Example:
This case study examines the response and recovery efforts of
various agencies after Hurricane Katrina…
Key Issues
Identify and briefly discuss the key issues and how they relate
to the key stakeholders.
Example:
· Inter-agency Coordination….
· Communication…
· Jurisdictional issues…
Analysis
Provide your analysis of each of the key issues described above.
Consider the likely root causes. Also, it is important to state
the starting point of your analysis. This disclaimer statement
includes your values, biases, preconceptions, and prejudices at
the onset of your analysis. Not only does this help the reader
know where you are coming from (“where you stand is where
you sit”), but it also helps you to understand where you are
coming from. It will make your analysis more transparent,
objective, and robust.

2. Example:
This case study is being analyzed as part of a class assignment.
I have no direct stake in the results or conclusions of this
analysis; however, as a victim of Hurricane Katrina, I have
formed certain conclusions and opinions about the role of
FEMA prior to this analysis. Prior to this analysis, it was my
opinion that FEMA….
Issue 1: Initially, emergency response was hampered by the
lack of coordination among the first responders. Many of the
coordination issues may be attributed to
misinformation….Lessons Learned, Recommendations, and
Practical Applications
Identify any lessons learned that can be applied by your agency
or organization, or by you as an individual.
Identify any organizational weaknesses or threats that came to
light from the readings.
Identify any strengths or opportunities that came to light from
the readings.
Consider the costs relative to the benefits of your
recommendations.
Discuss any potential barriers to implementation of your
recommendations.
Discuss the ramifications that may be associated with your
recommendations.
Identify any potential unintended consequences that may result
from the implementation of the ideas.

3. Each one of these areas can be under a separate sub-heading.
KINES 260 – Lab 1 – Enjoyment of Exercise
Introduction
Exercise psychologists have suggested that enjoyment may play
a major role in determining exercise adherence (Dishman,
Sallis, & Orenstein, 1985). Kendzierski and DeCarlo (1991)
created the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES) to
measure enjoyment of specific physical activity and
demonstrated adequate reliability and validity of the scale in
these two studies. Dishman, Motl, Saunders, Felton, Ward,
Dowda, and Pate (2005) also suggested that the following
factors appear to influence exercise enjoyment: choice of
physical activity, gender-separate activities, small group
interaction, inclusiveness, and relative lack of competition.
Research Question: Does choice of physical activity impact
subsequent exercise enjoyment?
Hypotheses
H1:
H0:
Method
Participants
Half the members of the class will be randomly assigned to a
‘Preferred choice activity’ (‘1’) group and half to a ‘Non-
preferred choice activity’ (‘2’) group.
Instruments
The 18-item PACES was chosen to measure exercise enjoyment
immediately after an exercise bout. Participants answered all

4. questions using a 7-point Likert scale. In previous research
(Kendzierski & DeCarlo, 1991), an internal consistency of .93
was reported on Cronbach’s alpha and adequate validity was
demonstrated.
Directions for scoring the PACES:
(1) When answering each item, rate how you are ‘feel at the
moment’ about the activity you just participated in.
(2) To determine a score, add the actual numbers you circled for
items 2, 3, 6, 8, 12, 15, and 18. The following items are reverse
scored: 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, and 17. Thus 1 = 7, 2 =
6, 3 = 5, 4 = 4, 5 = 3, 6 = 2, and 7 = 1. Compute an overall
score by summing the total number of points for each of the 18
items.
Procedures
1. You are randomly assigned to a preferred activity group (1)
or a non-preferred activity group (2), either aerobic exercise or
weight training depending on your favorite choice.
2. Undertake at least a 20 minute moderate intensity aerobic
(ellipse, treadmill, run, walk, cycle) or a moderate weight
training session depending on which group you were assigned
to. Check your heart rate after 10 and 20 minutes to make sure
you achieve your assigned training heart rate.
3. Complete the PACES immediately after the exercise bout is
concluded.
Results
Copy your total enjoyment score on the PACES and add it to the
class data grid. Next to your score under the Group column,
enter ‘1’ for the preferred activity group or a ‘2’ for the non-
preferred exercise group. Calculate one independent t-test
analysis to see if there is a significant group difference in total
enjoyment score using the PASW /SPSS statistical software.
Write up the statistical results to report if there was a
significant difference between the groups in the enjoyment

5. scores after the brief exercise. Compute the group means and
standard deviations of the enjoyment scores and copy this
information into a Table. Draw a bar graph (one that includes
the means of each group with standard error bars) and paste it
as a Figure.
Discussion
State your conclusions about your research and null hypotheses
based on your results. Compare your findings with any other
previously published research. State some weaknesses and
limitations of this basic experimental design and how they
might be improved.
Use your lab report format to produce a final lab report.
References
Dishman, R.K., Motl, R.W., Saunders, R., Felton, G., Ward,
D.S., Dowda, M., & Pate,
R.R. (2005). Enjoyment mediates the effects of a school-based
physical-activity
intervention. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 37,
478-487.
Dishman, R.K., Sallis, J. F., & Orenstein, D.O. (1985). The
determinants of physical
activity and exercise. Public Health Reports, 100, 158-171.
Kendzierski, D., & DeCarlo, K. (1991). Physical Activity
Enjoyment Scale; Two
validation studies. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,
13, 50-64.

6. To determine a score, add the actual numbers you circled for
items 2, 3, 6, 8, 12, 15, and 18. The following items are reverse
scored: 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, and 17. Thus 1 = 7, 2 =
6, 3 = 5, 4 = 4, 5 = 3, 6 = 2, and 7 = 1. Compute an overall
score by summing the total number of points for each of the 18
items.
Gender (1 = male, 2= female)
Age
Overall _Score
Activity_Group (1= preferred, 2= non preferred)
KINES 260 – RESEARCH SKILLS IN KINESIOLOGY
LAB REPORT EXAMPLE
Format of Lab Report
i) Type 12-pt font Times New Roman.
ii) Include title and sub-titles.
iii) Print figure(s) with title, axis labels, and key if necessary
(can be imported into the document or on a separate page).
iv) Include: Introduction; Method (Participants; Apparatus;
Procedures); Results; Discussion; References
v) Use APA style (6th edition)
Introduction

7. This section briefly introduces the reader to the topic and
explains the objectives of the study. Also, included are the
research hypothesis(es) and null hypothesis(es). This section
should clearly identify the purpose of the study.
Method
From reading this section anyone should be able to replicate the
study. The method section includes sub-sections with these side
headings: Participants, Apparatus, and Procedures.
Results
Provide statistical findings written out in sentences. In Table
format and in Figure format show the key results. Describe
what the Figure shows, including the means of the different
conditions.
Discussion
Here conclusions are made about the hypotheses based on the
results.
References
The full references are provided here for any articles mentioned
in the report to enable any reader to locate the article(s).
Movements to Smaller Targets are Slower than to Larger
Targets
Student Name
Introduction
A commonly held view is the notion that fast movements are
less accurate than slow movements. Alternatively, in an effort
to be accurate, movements are performed more slowly. This is
referred to as the speed-accuracy tradeoff. Fitts examined the
speed-accuracy tradeoff by recording the movement time for

8. tapping between different size targets (Fitts, 1954; Fitts &
Peterson, 1964). By varying the target size, the accuracy of
movement was constrained. He found that movement time
increased as the size of the target decreased. The study here
attempts to replicate these previous findings. Movement time
will be determined for tapping between small and large targets.
Research Hypothesis: H1: Movement time to hit a small target
is slower than moving to hit a larger target.
Null Hypothesis: H0: The size of a target does not influence the
movement time to reach the target.
Method
Participants
Twenty undergraduate students, twelve female and eight male,
completed this experiment as part of a Kinesiology majors
course. All except two participants were right handed. No
participant had any previous experience with this particular
task.
Apparatus
The apparatus included a piece of paper with a set of two target
boxes 10 cm from one another. The width of the target boxes
was 1 cm for the small target, and 2 cm for the large target. All
targets were 4 cm high. Participants held a pen which they
moved from target to target. The time was recorded using a
stopwatch.
Procedures
Participants held the pen in their dominant hand and started
inside one of the boxes. On the experimenters command to “go”
participants tapped the pen alternately in the two target boxes,
until the experimenter said “stop.” The experimenters recorded
the number of taps in each target during a 10 second interval.

9. This task was repeated three times each for the two different
sizes of target. If a participant missed the targets more than
three times in a single trial an additional trial was performed.
The average number of taps across the three trials for each
target was determined for each participant. To calculate the
average movement time of each tap, 10 seconds was divided by
the number of taps.
Results
Figure 1 illustrates that the movement time between the 1 cm
targets (mean = 0.32 s) was significantly slower than for the 2
cm targets (mean = 0.25s), t(19) = 2.36, p < .05.
(another Table Example)
Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations of Cognitive Tasks for Exercise
and Control Groups
Post-Test Means
Adjusted Means
Exercise
Control
Exercise
Control

10. _____________________________________________________
____________
Task
M
SD
M
SD
M
M
Verbal Fluency:
Letter Fluency
12.20
3.01
10.70
2.71
11.82
11.08
Category Fluency
13.60
3.53
9.80
4.64
13.09
10.31

11. Switch Correct Resp
12.40
2.80
11.40
2.41
11.78
12.02
Switching Accuracy
11.80
1.23
11.00
.82
11.49
11.31
Color-Word Interference:
Color Naming
12.10a
1.73
10.10a
2.08
11.84 10.36
Word Reading
12.30a
1.70
8.50a
1.90

12. 11.68
9.12
Inhibition
12.80
2.44
11.90
1.85
12.58
12.11
Inhibition with Switch
12.90
1.20
11.20
2.20
12.32
11.78
_____________________________________________________
______________
p < .05a
Figure 1. Mean Movement Time in a Reciprocal Tapping Task
to
Different Size Targets
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2

13. 0.25
0.3
0.35
1 2
Target Size (cm)
Movement Time (s)
Discussion
In support of the hypothesis, movements to the small target
were significantly slower than movements to the large target.
The findings are also in agreement with previous work which
has also shown participants make slower movements to smaller
targets (Fitts, 1954; Fitts & Peterson, 1964). The results here
support the notion of a speed-accuracy tradeoff, with
movements which require greater accuracy being made more
slowly than movements requiring less accuracy. This finding is
important for designing human-equipment interfaces. It suggests
that buttons that must be pressed quickly should be large.
References
Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human
motor system in controlling
the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 47, 381-391.
Fitts, P. M., & Peterson, J. R. (1964). Information capacity of
discrete motor responses.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 103-112.
Profile of Mood States Scores Before and After an Acute
Anaerobic and Aerobic Exercise Bout.
Introduction

14. The Profile of Moods States (POMS) was initially created by
Morgan in an attempt to predict athletic success (Weinberg and
Gould, 1993). The POMS consists of six subscales, five of
them are negative subscales (tension, confusion, fatigue, anger,
and depression) and one is positive (vigor). Morgan noticed
that an iceberg profile is created when all of the negative traits
are low and the positive trait is high (Morgan, 1979b). The
POMS has now been used as a measurement technique for
examining the effects exercise has on moods. It has been
documented in psychological literature that acute and chronic
benefits can arise from exercise (Berger et al, 2007). However,
much of the literature has only looked at aerobic exercise as the
mode of exercise. Interest is now in determining if both aerobic
and anaerobic exercise will illicit the same mood responses.
The aim of the present study is to determine if an acute
anaerobic exercise bout will produce the same mood scores as
an acute aerobic exercise bout.
Research Hypothesis: Aerobic exercise will have a
significantly better POMS scores than anaerobic exercise.
Null Hypothesis: There will be no difference in POMS scores
between an acute anaerobic exercise bout and aerobic exercise
bout.
Method
Participants. Twenty four students in a Kinesiology 260
classroom participated in this study. Each student was
randomly assigned to one of two exercise groups. Students that
didn’t have a two in their university account were instructed to
do aerobic exercise and students that had a two in their
university account were instructed to do anaerobic exercise.
(Mean and std dev of age to be reported) How many males and
how many females?
Apparatus. Each student was instructed to complete a shortened
version of the POMS (Shacham, 1983) consisting of 37

15. questions. Aerobic exercise was defined as doing the elliptical,
treadmill, walking, running or cycling. Depending on what the
student decided to use as aerobic exercise, multiple types of
instruments may have been used in the aerobic group.
Similarly, the anaerobic exercise was defined as doing anything
in the university’s weight room and therefore also will have
multiple instruments used in the anaerobic group.
Procedure: Each student was randomly selected to one of two
groups. Aerobic and anaerobic groups consisted of eleven and
thirteen participants respectively. Each member of both groups
was instructed to complete the POMS prior to working out.
After completing the POMS each student was to exercise for
about twenty minutes in their respective group. Upon
completing the twenty minute exercise bout, each student was to
complete the POMS again for a post-exercise score. Each
student was to hand the scores in to the classroom professors so
all scores could be posted for statistical analysis
Results
Provide a means and std dev table
Statistical analyses were run on SPSS software. An independent
t-test analysis was run between the change scores for the six
POMS score and the TGMDS score. A change score was
computed by subtracting the pre test POMS scores from the post
test POMS scores. The statistical results for the change scores
are as follows: (No statistically significant difference was
found) TGMDS (mean = ?, std dev = ?) t(22)= 1.546, p=.136,
depression t(22)= .085, p=.933, confusion t(22)= .340, p=.737,
tension t(22)= -.175, p=.863, vigor t(22)= -1.149, p=.263, anger
t(22)= .541, p=.594, and fatigue t(14.097)= 1.097, p=.291.
Figures I and II illustrate the mean aerobic and anaerobic scores
for the six scales of the POMS and the mean aerobic and
anaerobic score for the TGMDS respectively.

16. Figure I: Comparison of Mean Anaerobic and Aerobic Profile
of Mood States Change Scores for Kinesiology 260 Students
-3.00-2.00-1.000.001.002.003.004.005.00
Depress_change
Confus_change
Tension_change
vigor_change
Anger_change
Fatigue_change
Mean Anaerobic
Change Scores
Mean Aerobic
Change Scores
Figure II: Comparison of Mean Anaerobic and Aerobic
TGMDS Change Scores in Kinesiology 260 Students.
-16.00-14.00-12.00-10.00-8.00-6.00-4.00-2.000.00
Mean Aerobic
Change Scores
Mean Anaerobic
Change Scores
TGMDS_chang
e
Discussion
Interestingly, the results support the null hypothesis. No
statistically significant difference was found between the
aerobic and anaerobic group. Because no statistical test was run
to determine if there was difference between pre and post
exercise, no results are available. A dependent t-test should be
used to determine if there is difference between pre and post
scores. Literature suggests that exercise will illicit better mood
scores after an acute exercise bout (Weinberg and Gould, 2003).

17. Since motivation is an issue with exerciser adherence,
prescribing an appropriate program that will increase exercise
adherence is crucial (Weinberg and Gould, 2003). If it is
suggested that the mode of exercise does not matter for
improving mood scores, a trainer should pick the mode of
exercise his/her client is most interested in to improve exercise
adherence. Provide some reasoning why we may not have
observed that in this lab? Are there any criticisms to this lab?
Sources of error/limitations?
Limitations…considerations…implications…
References
Berger, B.G., Pargman, D., & Weinberg, R.S. (2007, 2nd Ed.).
Foundations of Exercise Psychology. Morgantown, WV: Fitness
Information Technology, Inc
Weinberg, R. and Gould, D. (2003, 3rd Ed.).Foundations of
sport and exercise psychology. Champaign, Il.